From the vast alfalfa fields in California’s Imperial Valley to the dense, water-intensive lawns found throughout cities such as Phoenix, a group of nonprofit organizations argue that the federal government’s criteria for “beneficial use” along the Colorado River require updating.
On Tuesday, the Natural Resources Defense Council along with several river advocacy groups submitted a legal petition urging the federal Bureau of Reclamation to exert more control over water usage regulations in the Lower Basin states—Nevada, California, and Arizona. The document admits this is an ambitious proposal.
The present administration of the Colorado River is entirely untenable,” stated Mark Gold, who serves as both the director of water scarcity solutions at the council and a UCLA professor, during an interview. “There must be significant action taken.
Although Nevada is permitted only
about 2 percent of the annual flow of the river
, that small percentage keeps taps flowing in Las Vegas, where almost all of the city’s water comes from the river.
All three states’ top Colorado River officials declined to comment on the petition Tuesday.
The Bureau of Reclamation, responsible for facilitating interstate discussions regarding water distribution among states post-2026, did not provide specific comments on the petition.
As
states remain deadlocked
on which ones should take cuts in how much water they can use, the agency emphasized in a statement its commitment to “long-term operational agreement for the river after 2026.”
The petition relies on Section 417 of federal regulations—a part of the code that grants the Bureau of Reclamation control over water distribution to the Lower Basin states, along with the duty to guarantee that water usage is prudent.
There are concerns that if the Bureau of Reclamation were to implement the measures proposed in the petition, it might lead to an increase in legal challenges from states and water users. This could potentially delay efforts toward conservation even further at a time when water managers can no longer afford to waste any moments.
The ag machine
Gold’s petition particularly highlights the inefficiencies within the agricultural sector, where
Over fifty percent of the river’s water gets utilized.
every year — far more than city use. The petition says exporting water-intensive crops is “akin to exporting water itself.”
California’s Imperial Valley, where farming is
a multibillion-dollar industry
, receives
More water than what Los Angeles, Phoenix, and Las Vegas together possess.
To cultivate crops such as alfalfa, carrots, and lettuce.
Gold hopes that the federal authorities will exercise greater judgment when selecting which contractors can redirect water from the river, giving priority to conservation efforts. He noted that certain methods, such as employing flood irrigation to soak fields with water, are impractical—particularly on scorching days that surpass 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
That doesn’t seem like a sensible way to utilize the Colorado River water for productive purposes,” Gold stated, “however, it ultimately depends on the Bureau of Reclamation to clarify what constitutes such usage and subsequently create a plan to guarantee that the water isn’t squandered.
Elizabeth Koebele, a professor at the University of Nevada, Reno, specializes in water policies concerning the Colorado River and was also a co-author
a study about the area’s agricultural producers
Federal oversight regarding who can and cannot engage in farming will inevitably lead to legal battles.
Koebele mentioned that the farmers she has met are fully informed about the condition of the river. However, these same farmers, who typically possess the oldest and most secure water rights along the river, understand that modernizing their long-standing agricultural methods requires significant investments of both time and capital.
Nearly every farmer I’ve spoken with during all my interviews has shared this sentiment: ‘Water rights are like our 401(k),’ ” Koebele stated. “‘It’s an inheritance that gets handed down through generations.’ Therefore, any adjustments we implement must take into account the established importance of senior water rights.
Nevada caught in crosshairs
Although Nevada is grouped together with its two sibling states in the Lower Basin, many aspects of what Gold and his team are focusing on aren’t particularly pertinent to the Las Vegas region.
Southern Nevada has established the standard for conservation throughout the basin — occasionally
to the chagrin of its residents
— recycling almost every drop of water used indoors, banning the use of evaporative swamp coolers in new commerical buildings, mandating the removal of some grass and incentivizing homeowners to remove other grass in their homes.
Though she sees how action from the Bureau of Reclamation could speed up other cities’ adoption of such policies, Koebele said these changes are often best handled locally, by water agencies that can oversee implementation, such as the Southern Nevada Water Authority.
We could potentially initiate significant changes at an elevated tier, yet these modifications would impact numerous statutes and guidelines established at the state level,” Koebele stated. “It’s crucial for us to consider this comprehensive range of measures.
Lawsuit could be forthcoming
Although there is no set deadline for the Bureau of Reclamation to reply to the petition, Gold mentioned that the coalition has not dismissed the possibility of filing a lawsuit which might compel the agency to act.
Meanwhile, time is slipping away as states work out a strategy beyond 2026.
Justin Pidot, an environmental law professor at the University of Arizona, concurs that the Bureau of Reclamation can play a more proactive part in determining water usage within the Lower Basin.
Although states may have their individual legal definitions for the beneficial use of water, the federal definition would probably take precedence, he mentioned.
For many years, the agency has maintained a hands-off approach, allowing states to reach their own water agreements, primarily due to the significant risk of legal challenges that could impede the decision-making process, according toPidot.
The extent of federal control over beneficial use in the Colorado River has yet to be challenged,” Pidot stated. “There’s an untested backup strategy where authorities adopt a far more assertive stance. It could potentially hold up legally, but it would undoubtedly spark numerous political and legal battles.
Even if the Bureau of Reclamation doesn’t respond to the petition, Gold stated that he aims to convey to negotiators that it is well overdue to contemplate more extreme measures for addressing the basin’s water crisis.
“The main point is to accelerate progress,” he stated.
NRDC Submission to the Bureau of Reclamation
by
Las Vegas Review-Journal
on Scribd
Contact Alan Halaly at
ahalaly@reviewjournal.com.
Follow
@AlanHalaly
on X.
©2025 Las Vegas Review-Journal. Visit reviewjournal.com.. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
